What makes a good street photograph?

[paul_cohn]

<p>Thanks, everyone. I'm trying to distill all this, and I like the concept of "subversive", 'tho to me "subversive" can be either large or small, either disturbing or humorous - anything that makes you look twice; and I also suppose it can be a snapshot, as long as the snapshot has a focus, an answer to the question "so what". That seconds2real website is great.</p>

[sd_woods]

<p>Well, if you like it, it's good. Doesn't really matter where it was taken..</p>

[rogerwb]

<blockquote>

<p>we need some photos here. Crappy or otherwise ;-)</p>

<p>here's a couple</p>

</blockquote><div></div>

[rogerwb]

<p>One More</p><div></div>

[kevin_oconnell1664880348]

<p>Street Photography!, love it. That was my first real test after years of photography. I wanted to see if I could let my pictures talk if you will. It took me six months before I figured it out. I was not happy at all with my work for at least six months until one day I finally figured it out. I found what worked for me and from their it was easy. I thew everything out that I had worked on up until that day. Street photography can very very emotional, dangerous, cold, and so much more.</p>

[steven_sherwin]

<blockquote>

<p>OK, and what does such "wisdom" tell us? Frankly, it doesn't me tell anything</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Please accept my humble apologies for wasting forum members time....</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"Please accept my humble apologies for wasting forum members time...."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why? Because someone disagreed with your opinion? Don't give up so easily.</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>As a manifesto, maybe Clive's statement doesn't work for all things, or all people, but I like the passion and the provocative thought behind it. I think those ideas are really something to think about. At least it's got me thinking.<br>

Snapshot works for me....snap.....shot..percieve react. It's one of the types of photo. You don't have to be married to any particularly one way, but a lot of shots are snaps..</p>

 

[tonmestrom]

<blockquote>

<p>Please accept my humble apologies for wasting forum members time....</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Steven, I was merely being sincere. It doesn't tell me anything. Winogrand, like many other photographers has made statements (soundbites) like this that are either meaningless or not consistent with their own work. In this case it tells me absolutely nothing, least of all what makes a good street photo which is the context of this thread. In other cases photographers have mocked elements of photography as being totally unimportant while their own work thrives on it. Too easy.</p>

[tonmestrom]

<blockquote>

<p>but I like the passion and the provocative thought behind it</p>

</blockquote>

<p>so do I Barry. That's why it needs to be pushed further</p>

[OPK]

<p>maybe this would work for you as an example...or not ;)<br /> <a href="http://www.abtmanphoto.com">www.abtmanphoto.com</a></p>

<p>I love street photography especially abroad where I can jump out of the context and sharpen my senses</p>

[greg_kowalczewski]

<p>So what makes a good street photograph?<br>

The emotion it generates.<br>

So what makes a good photograph?<br>

The emotion it generates.</p>

<p> </p>

[didibaev]

<p>"Photography is not about the thing photographed. It is about how that thing looks photographed", Garry Winogrand once said.</p>

[steven_sherwin]

<blockquote>

<p> It doesn't tell <em>me</em> anything<br>

This thread originated with an observation regarding Winogrand and I simply responded with a comment he made regarding street photography. Given this is a community photographic site, whether my comment resonates with a particular individual at his particular point in his photographic career is not the point. There may be other people for whom this comment (trite or otherwise) adds to their experience in photography.</p>

</blockquote>

[nickjeftic]

<p>To me good Street Photography very much resembles humor: it has a good story, which was well told and has found an audience with a sense of humor.</p>

[DickArnold]

<p>I am not usually a street photographer but I worked for a newspaper for several years. Most of what I shot was crap that went out to the garbage with yesterday's fish. But once in a while my colleagues or I would get a decent picture while on assignment. Usually it was capturing something human like an expression, or an unexpected public happening that grabbed interest. Incidentally these were mostly B&W. We strove for decent technical excellence, however. We developed and printed ourselves for hand lay up. Some street photos I see have poor focus, blocked up shadows or burned out highlights. Almost everything I did for the newspaper was, IMO, a snapshot except for my pictures of politicians where I tried to do anti-portrait portraits with direct flash. There was a woman named Galina who used to post here that did pictures that were technically exquisite and also captured the unusual, the sad, and the ugly quite well. She is really good at this stuff. I took a couple of pictures of killers on perp walks that I thought were quite good because of expressions.and made a few papers. They were on the street so I guess they were street pictures. Those were snapshots. In my experience a good news photo, many of which are nothing more than street shots, is just plain dumb-assed luck more often than not; at least in my case. </p>

[clive1]

<blockquote>

<p>I am not usually a street photographer but I worked for a newspaper for several years. Most of what I shot was crap that went out to the garbage with yesterday's fish. But once in a while my colleagues or I would get a decent picture while on assignment.</p>

<p> </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sorry mate, but it's not about you.</p>

[Allen Herbert]

<p>"So what makes a good street photograph?"</p>

<p>I have a loose understanding of evil but i'm not so sure about good. I always think that someone’s definition of good could also be someone’s definition of evil. </p>

<p>Could it be the same with street photography? Or, are there some noble rules of composition and technical excellence that lead to the path of goodness of street photography. Perhaps being different, innovative, new, is the road to goodness in street photography...all rather confusing this good stuff? Perhaps if we replace the world good with the word popular we might travel to that magical place. So, it is popular therefore by implication it must be good? So, i think of a sunset in Cuba, with a semi naked female draped across an old Cadillac, with perhaps an old fisherman with a crusty lined face draped in a fishing net...would that be popular and good?</p>

<p>I'm not really sure about this good, so, i will just have to be happy with enjoying myself pressing the big button, and let others worry about the good of it all.</p>

<div></div>

[fate_faith_change_chains]

<blockquote>

<p><em>A sunset in Cuba</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>No <em>that</em> triggers images all by itself ! For some reason it triggers also the line in a song ( Bananas & Blow, Ween ) :</p>

<p><em>" the rainy season reminds me of Maria, the way she danced, the color of her hair "</em><br /> <em><br /></em><br /> A good ( street )photograph should be like a good poem or verse, you have to want to read it more than one time, paraphrasing Robert Frank here more or less.</p>

[Allen Herbert]

<p>I often think that these “golden oldies” had an equal ability with words as they had with their perceptive eyes. I wonder if the two go hand in hand in a symbiosis way not necessarily exclusive.</p>

[fate_faith_change_chains]

<p>I don't know. Language is a beautiful thing, the written word especially. It can prison or capture thoughts as well as express and free them effectively, like the best photographs can and do, always will...</p>

[alin_daju]

<p>Fragments of a recipe for street photography:<br>

-anticipation<br>

-creativity<br>

-chance</p>

[DickArnold]

<p>Clive, perhaps I was a little obtuse. What makes a good street photographer IMO is what makes a good newspaper photographer, or wedding photographer or any other photographer for that matter. I think photographic skills are transferable. I think Jeff Spirer is great at it because he is good in several disciplines and knows the business. And, that in fact, IMO, newspaper and street photographers are akin to one another and greatly overlap. That is why I stated my journalistic qualifications. Firstly, good technical skills are important. I really don't like badly made photographs in any discipline and I don't think street photography is an excuse for poor exposure, fuzziness, burnt out highlights, etc. Secondly, I think a street photographer has to have some people skills; at least enough to recognize, find and capture human emotion whether surreptitiously, or by asking. Galina, whom I cited before has great technical skills, captures the tenor of life, and is highly versatile as a photographer. That means she has great capability to capture what she sees and her web site, last time I saw it, showed a broad range of talent in several photographic disciplines and specifically in street. I see too many who get into a rut and stay there, taking the same pictures over and over again. I do not claim to be very good at street but after twenty years of working at many forms of photography and having my own photo business I think I, at least, know decent photography when I see it. I also, as a dues paying member, with a biography, and sixty pictures posted am pretty transparent about my background and whatever skill is evident. I also know that i am free on photonet to express myself as long as I am civil in any way that I am comfortable expressing myself about the subject at hand. The one trend I see on PN is the trend toward incivility and that personal one liners sometimes contribute to that. </p>

[ralph_jensen]

<blockquote>

<p>"The one trend I see on PN is the trend toward incivility and that personal one-liners sometimes contribute to that."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, Dick, I too thought the personal nature of the one-line criticism (above) of your 10:17 a.m. post was unfair, especially since there are "I's" and "my's" in almost every post in this thread, not just in yours. Thanks for following up and explaining why you said the things you did.</p>

[fate_faith_change_chains]

<blockquote>

<p>Secondly, I think a street photographer has to have some people skills; at least enough to recognize, find and capture human emotion whether surreptitiously, or by asking.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Street photography is NOT necessarily and only people photography. Study the pioneer of streetphotography for a minute, not only that but also the one who can be considered both the Mozart and the Rembrandt of <em>photography</em>, which is Atget, and any "street<em>photographer</em> " worth a damn would know <em>that</em> much. There's no skill in snapping random people up close on the sidewalk with a 28 or 15mm.</p>